Luka Doncic Questionable Autograph Analysis

[KhalDrogo]

No bigger waste of time than debating with pg.

[pgisback]

Originally Posted by KhalDrogo

No bigger waste of time than debating with pg.

I would say making comments like this is a bigger waste of time.

[pgisback]

Originally Posted by RogerGodahell

First L looks exactly the same to me.

The slant, the style. Might be a different person but definitely can’t say for sure looking at those two autos. They look the same to me.

[al3xmac10]

Why are there 2 versions of the same Panini Instant 1/1 card?
One is sticker, one is on-card...

https://www.ebay.com/itm/143073429777
https://www.ebay.com/itm/303043706019

[RS1313]

Originally Posted by al3xmac10

Why are there 2 versions of the same Panini Instant 1/1 card?
One is sticker, one is on-card...

https://www.ebay.com/itm/143073429777
https://www.ebay.com/itm/303043706019

one of them is a 1/1 signed by luka and the other 1/1 is by his mom. #poonini

[COMCMax]

Another Optic listed. I'm wishy washy. I'm leaning towards he signs them all.

2018 19 Panini Optic FOTL Luka Doncic Prizm Holo Auto Rc

[gameissued]

The IP auto has no Panini seal on the case.. I have no idea without seeing the card in person but it could very well be just a HQ home made re-printed card.. then signed in person. Also the newer Panini Instant 1/1's should have circle watermarks on the back.

Originally Posted by al3xmac10

Why are there 2 versions of the same Panini Instant 1/1 card?
One is sticker, one is on-card...

[pgisback]

So what's the Blowout Forensic teams analysis of these? The L is too high to be his moms, but the auto is too nice to be Luka's. Mystery 3rd signer?

[brettmik59]

Originally Posted by pgisback

So what's the Blowout Forensic teams analysis of these? The L is too high to be his moms, but the auto is too nice to be Luka's. Mystery 3rd signer?

That centering tho...

[theLUCKYshow]

Here's most of the optic autos that have surfaced:

^^These are his squiggly autos he used for Next Day, Absolute on-card, and Flawless Collegiate (am I missing any?). No one is questioning these if I'm not mistaken. If you looked at the totality of Lukas autos though, these scribble autos would also raise flags. Luckily he signed these squigglies for Next Day in front of Panini Reps. Also note these are his common optic autos, not his nicer Holo and up auto cards which have the loopy auto. It does make sense he'd care less about signing the big stack of base cards and more about the shiny stuff.

These are his loopy autos that are being questioned. They are undoubtedly all over the place, with different signing speeds, angles, and loops. These loopy autos alone look like it could've been done by two people... or a quirky Luka. OP pointed out this loopy style auto seems to be an attempt to copy his old auto from his days at Real Madrid like this one:
Also look at the superfractor auto again. It is the nicest and slowest signing speeding of all the autos, and is the same signer of his sticker autos imo. Whoever signed it knew it was a special card and took their time, just like they did with the stickers.

So for Lukas Optic autos what do we know so far? A few scribble autos that arent being questioned are found on some of his base autos. He also has loopy base versions. All of his Holo and up autos have been loopy, with the slowest, nicest auto being his 1/1 gold vinyl. We'll have a lot more examples to digest next week and hopefully we can learn something from them.

I also posted my Luka auto on IG (theluckyshow05) and @paniniamerica and @lukadoncicto to see if they could shed light on the growing rumor that most Luka autos are fake. I'd be surprised if they responded but who knows.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[RogerGodahell]

People are gonna believe what they want to believe Lucky. Im in the he signed them all camp with you. That last real madrid auto you posted above is the perfect example of how he can sign neatly if he wants to.

[Yaz1966]

Originally Posted by theLUCKYshow

I also posted my Luka auto on IG (theluckyshow05) and @paniniamerica and @lukadoncicto to see if they could shed light on the growing rumor that most Luka autos are fake. I'd be surprised if they responded but who knows.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Thanks for that, I'm curious to hear if they respond. The problem is the squiggly version used for the Next days and the top 2 Optic autos (among others) are not even a lazy or quick version of 'Lulu' they are completely different.

[Yaz1966]

Originally Posted by RogerGodahell

People are gonna believe what they want to believe Lucky. Im in the he signed them all camp with you. That last real madrid auto you posted above is the perfect example of how he can sign neatly if he wants to.

Of course you are

Originally Posted by RogerGodahell

Can't im sticking with my plan. It's been tough, but i've been acquiring a lot of wax though. If he does good my wax will do good. So that'll have to be good enough for me. I have to say it's been a hard test of will power though.

[Lee42]

I have no doubt there are quite a few people who are saying yes he has signed them all are the same people that have already spent lots of money on Lukas autos and/or have purchased a lot of unopened product and have an investment to protect.

If it turns out that he hasnt signed some of those cards, there are a lot of people who could potentially be out of pocket a lot of money!

Hell if I had spent thousands on products/his autos id be hoping like hell he signed them all!

Has he? Who knows? But I think there is enough evidence so far to at least have some doubts about his autos.

[theLUCKYshow]

Originally Posted by Lee42

Has he? Who knows? But I think there is enough evidence so far to at least have some doubts about his autos.

That's all I'm trying to point out. This isnt some open shut case like some have decided it is but to each his own. He has two distinct signatures with variations within both styles. That's irrefutable. Are the slower loopy autos suspicious? Absolutely but let's keep digging.

And a lot of you might not believe me but this isn't about the money for me. I have $1k invested in his autos but I'm not going broke if it turns worthless. Most of my Lukas are non-autos and who knows maybe they become more desirable if his autos are fake anyways. I genuinely dont care about the financials involved here. I just want to know what's going on and I havent made a definitive decision yet. I do lean towards him signing all of his autos though based on looking at hundreds and hundreds of them.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[RogerGodahell]

Originally Posted by Yaz1966

Of course you are

Yep i've been buying a lot of wax i don't collect singles anymore. Been trying to diversify the years as i was a little heavy on 18-19 but im slowly starting to even things out.

I still don't think his autos being signed by someone else is not a shut and closed case like many people do though. Are some of them questionable? Sure but there's no concrete hard evidence imo.

[pgisback]

Originally Posted by Lee42

I have no doubt there are quite a few people who are saying yes he has signed them all are the same people that have already spent lots of money on Lukas autos and/or have purchased a lot of unopened product and have an investment to protect.

If it turns out that he hasnt signed some of those cards, there are a lot of people who could potentially be out of pocket a lot of money!

Hell if I had spent thousands on products/his autos id be hoping like hell he signed them all!

Has he? Who knows? But I think there is enough evidence so far to at least have some doubts about his autos.

The high L, Lulus in Optic really throw a wrench in to the original argument. I don’t own any Luka autos because I don’t like how he signs Lulu. I just don’t think your guys argument is nearly as cut and dry as you’re trying to claim it is.

[rogermaris]

Originally Posted by Lee42

I have no doubt there are quite a few people who are saying yes he has signed them all are the same people that have already spent lots of money on Lukas autos and/or have purchased a lot of unopened product and have an investment to protect.

Originally Posted by Yaz1966

Of course you are

Originally Posted by KhalDrogo

No bigger waste of time than debating with pg.

[pgisback]

Originally Posted by rogermaris

I see you’re still ignoring the tall L optics and now posting monkey pictures. I wonder why.

[rogermaris]

Originally Posted by pgisback

I see you’re still ignoring the tall L optics and now posting monkey pictures. I wonder why.

I see you're still ignoring all the other features of that autograph that make it wrong (compression, shape, slant, letter spacing). You're also focusing on individual trees rather than the forests in front of you, and ignoring all the circumstantial evidence we have in addition to the physical autographs.

Let me take this opportunity to address to the two most common specious responses I've seen you and others make.

RESPONSE 1: People change their signature all the time, why can’t Luka??

He can and did change his signature. Lots of athletes change all the time and it's no cause for alarm.

The problem is, Luka has created two signatures that are motivated in ways that cant be reconciled with one another.

We know when he entered the NBA he shortened his signature drastically. This was motivated by the fact that he wanted to take less time to sign (since that’s the only reason you shorten your signature). Then, at the same time as he’s signing with his short signature, he starts using a time-consuming signature to sign thousands of stickers. This simply does not pass the smell test.

Sometimes athletes randomly change their signature to something completely different just because they feel like it. But what they don’t usually do, is change their signature to something really long and slow while at the same time trying to shorten it to something fast and easy, and switch between them at the same time.

The fact that the questionable LULU signatures only started appearing as the demands on Luka grew and grew lends credence to this theory…


RESPONSE 2: I found this questionable LULU autograph and to me it looks similar to this pre-NBA LULU signature I found. You must be wrong!

First of all, when someone is trying to forge someone else’s signature, they will occasionally create one that looks similar to one of the thousands of known real exemplars.

The key is not to focus on picking and choosing trees to fit your argument. The key is looking at the group of evidence collectively all together. So lets look at our three forests.

Forest one: Pre-NBA LULU signatures. GENERAL features: Tall, compressed lettering, no heavy slant. Shape of autograph is often square or a vertical rectangle

Forest two: Shortened NBA signatures. GENERAL features: Tall, compressed lettering, no heavy slant. Shape of autograph is often square or a vertical rectangle

Forest three: Questionable LULU signatures GENERAL features: Stout, spaced out lettering, heavy slant. Shape of autograph is usually a long horizontal rectangle.

So here’s the rub. I can probably find some individual trees in forest 3 that will match some in forest two or one. Again, if none of the trees were even close, the forger isn’t doing their job.

But when I go up in a helicopter and look down at the three forests, it’s very clear to see that forest one and two are composed of one type of tree (since the important handwriting features match). But then when you look at forest three, while a lot of the trees look superficially similar to the other ones, you notice patterns in the handwriting features that do not match the patterns present on the two other styles of autograph, which both match one another.

So by all means keep posting that picture of the signed jersey (which by the way, is the same image I addressed in the first post of this thread...). You can do that all day but it doesn't refute the argument. You need to address the entirety of the physical evidence AND the circumstantial evidence in order to make a compelling argument.

PS: To address the specific points. The auto on the jersey you posted is square, the optic one is a horizontal rectangle. I've also noticed Luka will often end his last U with a downtick (but not always). That being said I've never seen him write it like a big loopy W the way it appears on the optic card...

And again, these are the two cherry-picked autographs that you say match perfectly... and compared to some of the others that aren't even close, it's not a bad match. If these were the only two autographs we had and we were working in a vacuum I wouldn't have posted in the first place. But when combined with all the other evidence, the picture completely changes...

[pgisback]

Originally Posted by rogermaris

I see you're still ignoring all the other features of that autograph that make it wrong (compression, shape, slant, letter spacing). You're also focusing on individual trees rather than the forests in front of you, and ignoring all the circumstantial evidence we have in addition to the physical autographs.

Let me take this opportunity to address to the two most common specious responses I've seen you and others make.

RESPONSE 1: People change their signature all the time, why can’t Luka??

He can and did change his signature. Lots of athletes change all the time and it's no cause for alarm.

The problem is, Luka has created two signatures that are motivated in ways that cant be reconciled with one another.

We know when he entered the NBA he shortened his signature drastically. This was motivated by the fact that he wanted to take less time to sign (since that’s the only reason you shorten your signature). Then, at the same time as he’s signing with his short signature, he starts using a time-consuming signature to sign thousands of stickers. This simply does not pass the smell test.

Sometimes athletes randomly change their signature to something completely different just because they feel like it. But what they don’t usually do, is change their signature to something really long and slow while at the same time trying to shorten it to something fast and easy, and switch between them at the same time.

The fact that the questionable LULU signatures only started appearing as the demands on Luka grew and grew lends credence to this theory…


RESPONSE 2: I found this questionable LULU autograph and to me it looks similar to this pre-NBA LULU signature I found. You must be wrong!

First of all, when someone is trying to forge someone else’s signature, they will occasionally create one that looks similar to one of the thousands of known real exemplars.

The key is not to focus on picking and choosing trees to fit your argument. The key is looking at the group of evidence collectively all together. So lets look at our three forests.

Forest one: Pre-NBA LULU signatures. GENERAL features: Tall, compressed lettering, no heavy slant. Shape of autograph is often square or a vertical rectangle

Forest two: Shortened NBA signatures. GENERAL features: Tall, compressed lettering, no heavy slant. Shape of autograph is often square or a vertical rectangle

Forest three: Questionable LULU signatures GENERAL features: Stout, spaced out lettering, heavy slant. Shape of autograph is usually a long horizontal rectangle.

So here’s the rub. I can probably find some individual trees in forest 3 that will match some in forest two or one. Again, if none of the trees were even close, the forger isn’t doing their job.

But when I go up in a helicopter and look down at the three forests, it’s very clear to see that forest one and two are composed of one type of tree (since the important handwriting features match). But then when you look at forest three, while a lot of the trees look superficially similar to the other ones, you notice patterns in the handwriting features that do not match the patterns present on the two other styles of autograph, which both match one another.

So go ahead and keep posting that picture of the signed jersey (which by the way, is the same image I addressed in the first post of this thread...). You can do that all day but it doesn't refute the argument. You need to address the entirety of the physical evidence AND the circumstantial evidence in order to make a compelling argument.

Your argument was about the size of the L in relation to the auto. We said that it's possible his auto changes depending on the area of which he has to sign, which is pretty logical. So now we have new autographs coming out from Optic, which are on card and have a much larger space to sign, and his autos look exactly like his Pre-NBA autographs. So it is really easy to assume his IP or even Next Day autos are his rushed autos that are just scribbles and his sticker/at home autos are more spaced out and he takes time to draw the U like he did before the NBA.

These can very easily be from the same person. Anyone who says they can't is just making things up at this point.

[COMCMax]

A Lulu Auto 1/1 sticker out of Optic.

2018-19 OPTIC LUKA DONCIC ROOKIE DOMINATOR GOLD VINYL SUPERFRACTOR AUTO RC 1/1

[sjay2k]

So, OP, can you do a mock-up of how you expect that tall version of the signature would fit on a sticker? See post #110 for how ridiculous it would look.

[rogermaris]

Originally Posted by sjay2k

So, OP, can you do a mock-up of how you expect that tall version of the signature would fit on a sticker? See post #110 for how ridiculous it would look.

Here' a card with a signing area roughly the same size as a sticker. He made his autograph ridiculously small in order to make it fit. He did not write L U L U in long cursive letters to fill the space. You may think it looks silly but that's how he seems to prefer to do it:



Also don't forget that we have stickers with his Lulu auto on it. Surprise surprise, even when signing Lulu on a sticker, he compresses his auto and only uses about 50% of the sticker:




We have both versions of his auto signed on a sticker sized space. Neither of them look like the questionable L U L U autos.

Originally Posted by pgisback

These can very easily be from the same person. Anyone who says they can't is just making things up at this point.

This is where I actually totally agree with you. No one can say anything with absolute certainty about these autographs, including myself. All the alternate scenarios presented by you and sjay2k could be totally valid. Panini may release a video of him signing his optic cards tomorrow and you guys can laugh at me and I'll eat a big slice of humble pie. But if that happens I'll say again what I'll say now: I'm not claiming he didn't sign his cards. I'm saying, based on all the current evidence, I think it's more likely he didn't sign the cards than did.

[sjay2k]

The example you posted doesn't fit the dimensions of a sticker. He would constantly fly off the top and bottom of the sticker if he signed like that. You should try signing on some stickers. You really do need to be careful.

And the old UD autos aren't really relevant, other than that the style is generally similar.